Log message #4174759

# At Username Text
# Jan 23rd, 16:24 ricksaccous they prob already have it XD
# Jan 23rd, 16:23 neon1024 Yes, a while ago governments wanted backdoors to encryption
# Jan 23rd, 16:23 ricksaccous pretty sad
# Jan 23rd, 16:23 ricksaccous there are actually people pushing for regulations on algorithms or at least i read something like that in some clickbait article
# Jan 23rd, 16:22 neon1024 Well tbh I won’t be European soon either :,(
# Jan 23rd, 16:22 ricksaccous lolll
# Jan 23rd, 16:22 neon1024 Lucky you! We had a 2.5h online course, with a quiz you had to pass
# Jan 23rd, 16:22 ricksaccous I'm not even European
# Jan 23rd, 16:22 ricksaccous i had to watch a 15 minute video about GDPR for work
# Jan 23rd, 16:21 neon1024 So some data which could be used either wholly or in part to identify a specific individual
# Jan 23rd, 16:21 ricksaccous hehe, dangggggg
# Jan 23rd, 16:21 neon1024 Yeah, part of GDPR. It’s *P*ersonally *I*dentifyable *I*nformation
# Jan 23rd, 16:20 ricksaccous what is PII data btw, is that related to the EU privacy laws or something
# Jan 23rd, 16:18 ricksaccous but yeah you'd have to encrypt the search string
# Jan 23rd, 16:18 neon1024 Yeah, I think you’re right @ricksaccous
# Jan 23rd, 16:18 ricksaccous you can't really use like or it will prob be nonsensical to do so
# Jan 23rd, 16:18 ricksaccous i think it will be hard unless you are okay with them searching an exact match
# Jan 23rd, 16:18 neon1024 Encrypt it an SQL that?
# Jan 23rd, 16:17 neon1024 Figured filtering I could use the `Search.Callback`, but I don’t know quite how to match against an encrypted string
# Jan 23rd, 16:17 neon1024 Is this going to make filtering and sorting either hard or impossible?
# Jan 23rd, 16:17 neon1024 Presumably because ‘neon1024’ doesn’t match the encrypted string in the SQL
# Jan 23rd, 16:16 neon1024 Sooo, I encrypted the PII data in my database, and now my filtering and sorting doesn’t work
# Jan 23rd, 15:36 cpierce :-
# Jan 23rd, 15:36 cpierce n/m i'm on 0.9.2 that's why
# Jan 23rd, 15:33 cpierce because we use drop()->save(); a bunch in the docs - just makign sure i'm not just doing something stupid
# Jan 23rd, 15:33 cpierce is that something i need to update in the docs?
# Jan 23rd, 15:33 cpierce ... drop(); works just fine
# Jan 23rd, 15:33 cpierce and it's saying it can't save because it doesn't exist
# Jan 23rd, 15:33 cpierce i'm calling ->drop()->save() in an up migration
# Jan 23rd, 15:33 cpierce query question about phinx
# Jan 23rd, 15:22 neon1024 Just need to deploy a release to production
# Jan 23rd, 15:22 neon1024 @dereuromark No, sorry, I didn’t see it :slightly_smiling_face:
# Jan 23rd, 15:17 dereuromark @neon1024
# Jan 23rd, 15:17 dereuromark Did you see my github api dto example? I wanna see you do the alternative, and then we compare
# Jan 23rd, 13:54 daniel.upshaw That did it for you? I was running into POST fields, seems something different, did solve... thank you though!
# Jan 23rd, 13:00 neon1024 3.4 was quite a bit, and it seems like 3.7 is a reasonable chunk too
# Jan 23rd, 12:59 neon1024 It’s good that things are progressing, but occasionally when you update a minor patch version there is quite a bit of work to do
# Jan 23rd, 12:59 neon1024 It does feel like that in some places
# Jan 23rd, 12:46 neothermic This feature is so new that we've decided to deprecate it before we released it!
# Jan 23rd, 12:44 neon1024 Although it would be a bit confusing for the page to just say New feature! Deprecated!
# Jan 23rd, 12:43 neon1024 I’d be in favour of another boxy element, perhaps in yellow saying ‘Deprecated: This class has been moved. See Command Helpers for more information’